| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On 2020-12-12 02:07, Roy Bamford wrote: |
| 4 |
> Does your post represent the council considered opinion or only |
| 5 |
> your own? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
At the moment I am speaking for myself. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> Its a reasonable problem statement that the forums team can |
| 11 |
> work with to devise potential solutions. I discussed something |
| 12 |
> similar with dilfridge and k_f at FOSDEM 2019. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I have a major concern with the concept of the council |
| 15 |
> deciding to close any part of the forum. Its like this ... |
| 16 |
> At present, Gentoo is a common carrier, like the mail. |
| 17 |
> The content of letters and parcels is of little concern to the |
| 18 |
> carrier. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Gentoos status could be changed by a council decision to |
| 21 |
> close any part of the forum from common carrier to publisher, |
| 22 |
> were the council seen to be exercising editorial control. |
| 23 |
> Being a publisher makes Gentoo liable for the published |
| 24 |
> content. Gentoo could not run the forums at all under those |
| 25 |
> conditions. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> Getting legal advice on that point and taking on the |
| 28 |
> resulting legal liabilities that result is a job for the |
| 29 |
> Foundation, not the council. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> [...] |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> Can the council provide a problem statement that a least |
| 34 |
> a majority of the members support? |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Let's cool down the heated debate a bit. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Anyone can bring up a topic to council at anytime. This also applies to |
| 39 |
council members and nothing else has happened yet. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
I don't get your reference. Like said, this is not about free speech. |
| 42 |
Not about section 230 currently discussed in the US: |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
We as Gentoo community have created our code of conduct. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
The code of conduct we created should protect our values. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
This has nothing to do with liability. It doesn't matter if anything |
| 49 |
which happened violates any law applying to Gentoo foundation or not. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
This is about our 'own' law we gave ourselves to protect the values we |
| 52 |
believe in to run this Linux distribution and how we want to treat each |
| 53 |
other while doing what we love. |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
Don't you believe in our code of conduct? |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
Don't you agree that from time to time, especially those active in the |
| 58 |
OTW forum adopt the wrong tone and tend to offend people? |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
I think you do. Like I hope every community member do. |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
The current motion is about those few people (<20!) who don't. All of |
| 63 |
them will have the chance to change their behavior in case they really |
| 64 |
share our values. If they don't, those people no longer have a place in |
| 65 |
our community. |
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
And that's also why I think you don't need any statement: |
| 68 |
|
| 69 |
A community member like you and me brought to everyone's attention that |
| 70 |
there's a place in Gentoo forums where a minority of people violates our |
| 71 |
code of conduct from time to time and want to stop that (and not for the |
| 72 |
first time but hopefully for the last time!). |
| 73 |
|
| 74 |
We are currently in the process to find a solution for this. And |
| 75 |
everyone in Gentoo is invited to join and help with that problem. |
| 76 |
Especially the current forums team who usually do a great job. |
| 77 |
|
| 78 |
Of course, if nobody comes up with another, working, solution, like |
| 79 |
said, we will have no choice but to close it. |
| 80 |
|
| 81 |
Please join the process. I think we all agree that we need to address |
| 82 |
this problem because we believe in the values Gentoo is known for but we |
| 83 |
can only do this together. |
| 84 |
|
| 85 |
|
| 86 |
-- |
| 87 |
Regards, |
| 88 |
Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer |
| 89 |
C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D 74A5 |
Archives